Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The between far fetched and delusional is a fine one.

A transwoman looks like a woman, has sex like a woman, and is legally a woman. That's not delusional. They are, in more ways then not, women. They are men in very few ways, if any. A transwoman is mentally healthier than prior to the process. Not a delusion.

No matter what you do, you won't actually become an alien.

 Goliath wrote:

 easysauce wrote:

 Goliath wrote:
The issue here is that there aren't three genders (being Male, Female and Xenu), so identifying as "Xenu" is just you being a dick, or having mental issues, or both. Unfortunately for you, there is no surgery available to allow you to transition from (presumably) male, to Xenu; nor is there the legal recourse to allow you to legally become "Xenu" (In any aspect other than name).

Therefore, up until the point in time at which "Xenu Identity Disorder" becomes a recognised thing, you're out of luck sadly.

I wish you luck in your rule of mankind though; it would make a pleasant change from the secret cabal of space lizards. (Unless you're a space lizard, in which case we've already got a surplus)

I can certainly get surgery to make me LOOK like an alien... surgery is 100% capable of that, legally, yes I can also have my ethnicity changed to that word, so both your points there fail.

you middle point, "Therefore, up until the point in time at which "Xenu Identity Disorder" becomes a recognised thing, you're out of luck sadly."

so before the world recognized "trans-identities" those people were just "dick(s), or having mental issues" as you so eloquently put it?

cant pick and choose what identities are valid (well you can, it just makes you a hyppocrate)

Is it possible to be born as an alien? yes/no?

Not everyone is British, so yes.


I believe you mean "Is it possible to be born as an extraterrestrial?"

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Goliath wrote:

 easysauce wrote:

 Goliath wrote:
The issue here is that there aren't three genders (being Male, Female and Xenu), so identifying as "Xenu" is just you being a dick, or having mental issues, or both. Unfortunately for you, there is no surgery available to allow you to transition from (presumably) male, to Xenu; nor is there the legal recourse to allow you to legally become "Xenu" (In any aspect other than name).

Therefore, up until the point in time at which "Xenu Identity Disorder" becomes a recognised thing, you're out of luck sadly.

I wish you luck in your rule of mankind though; it would make a pleasant change from the secret cabal of space lizards. (Unless you're a space lizard, in which case we've already got a surplus)

I can certainly get surgery to make me LOOK like an alien... surgery is 100% capable of that, legally, yes I can also have my ethnicity changed to that word, so both your points there fail.

you middle point, "Therefore, up until the point in time at which "Xenu Identity Disorder" becomes a recognised thing, you're out of luck sadly."

so before the world recognized "trans-identities" those people were just "dick(s), or having mental issues" as you so eloquently put it?

cant pick and choose what identities are valid (well you can, it just makes you a hyppocrate)

Is it possible to be born as an alien? yes/no?

Not everyone is British, so yes.


I believe you mean "Is it possible to be born as an extraterrestrial?"

Well yes, but I was using the term that Easysauce used for continuity's sake.

 Goliath wrote:
Is it possible to be born as an alien? yes/no?

yes, its 100% possible to be born an alien, but in a human body, just as trans gender people claim to be "men born in womens bodies" and vise versa.
also, humans could have babies in space, aliens somewhere must be having babies.


I love how all of a sudden what you are born as is now "what you must be" according to you... seriously, that is the literal antithesis of the transgender movement.

 easysauce wrote:

 Goliath wrote:
Is it possible to be born as an alien? yes/no?

yes, its 100% possible to be born an alien, but in a human body, just as trans gender people claim to be "men born in womens bodies" and vise versa.
also, humans could have babies in space, aliens somewhere must be having babies.


I love how all of a sudden what you are born as is now "what you must be" according to you... seriously, that is the literal antithesis of the transgender movement.

Aliens don't exist. Women do. Becoming a woman is something that makes sense. Becoming something fictional makes... less sense.

Also, there is no package of societal roles for aliens. Transwomen don't want to be treated like something different, they want to be treated like women.

 easysauce wrote:

 Goliath wrote:
Is it possible to be born as an alien? yes/no?

yes, its 100% possible to be born an alien, but in a human body, just as trans gender people claim to be "men born in womens bodies" and vise versa.
also, humans could have babies in space, aliens somewhere must be having babies.


I love how all of a sudden what you are born as is now "what you must be" according to you... seriously, that is the literal antithesis of the transgender movement.

Transitioning gender =\= transitioning species.

A Therian can believe they're a cat or dog, but they'll never be a cat or dog, no matter how they much identify as such.

Gender is much more transmutable than species.

some would say trans women dont exist, just men that cut off their junk and had hormone therapy. They would be wrong, just as you are wrong polonius.

aliens do exist, even if they did not, I could just as easily choose to identify as a cat, dog, chair, or peice of cheese. These things are most certainly real, and surgery exists to make me LOOK like them.

my biological identity, has nothing to do with it, just as you assert the biological identity of a trans woman (who is biologically a man) has nothing to do with it.


so you keep asserting, on the one hand that biology doesnt matter at all for trans gendered people,

but that biology is the ONLY thing that matters for transhuman peoples?

and just FYI, trans human, is a recognized thing.

just saying.

 easysauce wrote:

 Goliath wrote:
Is it possible to be born as an alien? yes/no?

yes, its 100% possible to be born an alien, but in a human body, just as trans gender people claim to be "men born in womens bodies" and vise versa.
also, humans could have babies in space, aliens somewhere must be having babies.


I love how all of a sudden what you are born as is now "what you must be" according to you... seriously, that is the literal antithesis of the transgender movement.

And I love how you can't seem to follow a simple line of reasoning and are calling me a hypocrite when you can't even spell it.

ALIENS ARE NOT REAL.

It is not possible for anyone to be born as a biological alien/extra-terrestrial/Xenu, because aliens/extra-terrestrials/Xenu ARE NOT REAL.

It is possible for a human to be born as biologically male, female, or anywhere in between. it is not possible for a human to be born as biologically alien/extra-terrestrial/Xenu.

Human-Male/Human-Female are on the same level; it is possible to transition between them with virtually no appreciable difference between the intended gender and your appearance.

Human/Alien are not on the same level, much as Human/Giraffe, Human/Hippo, Human/Anglerfish, Human/Termite, and Human/Eagle are not on the same level.

To equate a person feeling that they have been born into the wrong sex with a person feeling that they have been born into the wrong (imaginary) species is quite frankly asinine.

 easysauce wrote:
my biological identity, has nothing to do with it, just as you assert the biological identity of a trans woman (who is biologically a man) has nothing to do with it.

It's like a shift change. You're making the same dumb argument.

Biological identity has a lot to do with social identity. We don't consider crossdresser to be women, as a rule, nor do we consider furries to be animals. A person that has altered their body and hormones and presents as a different gender has made large biological changes to their identity, which engenders a certain respect.

so you keep asserting, on the one hand that biology doesnt matter at all for trans gendered people,

So far, other people have said that I've said that more times then I've said that, which is zero times.

but that biology is the ONLY thing that matters for transhuman peoples?

and just FYI, trans human, is a recognized thing.

just saying.

Well, not being a troll is the thing that matters for your xenu argument.

But if you want to change your species, you can try. I don't know what, exactly, you expect to happen.

the question isn't how much a person is the thing they claim to be. I mean, how much of a Man am I, really? The question is to what extent does society recognize you as that identity. Society doesn't recognize anybody as an alien, and if you want to be treated as an animal, prepare to be disappointed. There are also ethical question of the extent to which you can disavow the will and agnecy of humanity, but whatever.

The question is, should a person that identifies as a woman, looks like a woman, and has undergone a lot of work to be anatomically female, be treated as a female?

Another point:

Most transhumans, to my knowledge, do not undergo extensive surgery to match their physical species to their mental species.

The most extensive "species re-assignment" that I can find after a quick google, is the case of Daniel Avner, who spent many thousands of dollars undergoing surgery so that he could become a cat



based on that photo, he would not "pass" as a cat.
Most trans* people, however, would most definitely "pass" as the sex they are striving for.

To say that a trans* person who undergoes surgery and hormone therapy, and if put in a crowd could not be picked out as trans* is the exact same situation as Daniel Avner is silly.

Why do his arms have scales like a lizard? Worst cat ever!

 Goliath wrote:

The most extensive "species re-assignment" that I can find after a quick google, is the case of Daniel Avner, who spent many thousands of dollars undergoing surgery so that he could become a cat

Spoiler:

And not just a cat. He specifically got surgeries to look like a female tiger.

 Goliath wrote:
Another point:

Most transhumans, to my knowledge, do not undergo extensive surgery to match their physical species to their mental species.

so, because the surgery didnt exist 100 years ago for gender reasignment, then 100 years ago there were no transgender people?

trans gender, is not defined by the surgery you undergo, it is defined by how you feel. A trans person who has had 0 surgery has just as much of a right to choose how they identify as someone who has spent millions making the cosmetic changes.

Ironclad Warlord wrote:
I don't have anything against them but i'm not able to understand why any guy would want his parts cut off, I mean isn't that like the greatest fear most men have?

A man doesn't want his parts cut off. He likes his parts, they are part of his identity as a man. Some men have bigger identities than others.

A woman doesn't need and doesn't want these parts and has no problem getting the correct parts.

 easysauce wrote:

and while you could argue that my description of the process of becoming a trans-gender as being "trivial" it is, FACTUAL... they get surgery, take pills, fill out some forms and now they are X-gender as if biology didnt matter.

Biology does matter. That's why they are using surgery and hormones to make their biology match their identity.

If anything is being trivialized, its actual biological men and women, and what it means to be one.

If being a man = having a penis, then surgically creating a penis because you are a man doesn't really trivialize biological men.

If being a woman = having women hormones, then taking woman hormones because you are a woman doesn't trivialize biological women.

 easysauce wrote:

 Goliath wrote:
Another point:

Most transhumans, to my knowledge, do not undergo extensive surgery to match their physical species to their mental species.

so, because the surgery didnt exist 100 years ago for gender reasignment, then 100 years ago there were no transgender people?

trans gender, is not defined by the surgery you undergo, it is defined by how you feel. A trans person who has had 0 surgery has just as much of a right to choose how they identify as someone who has spent millions making the cosmetic changes.

That's actually a pretty debatable point, at least in the broader sense.

Strictly speaking, an individual can identify however he wants, even as Xenu. The extent to which society should respect that identity is different. We tend to look at commitment to the identity, and ability to take the identity seriously before extending them the treatment they request.

 d-usa wrote:
Biology does matter. That's why they are using surgery and hormones to make their biology match their identity.

you dont know what biology is... surgery cannot change your biological sex anymore then it can change your race or species. It can sure make you LOOK like whatever else, but thats not the same.

surgery and hormone pills are not a persons "biology", and these process 100% do NOT make someone trans gendered (they are welcome changes that I fully support for concenting adults to undergo)

otherwise, I could take an unwilling participant, do some surgery + pills, and bam, your are now biologically a woman.

So while they may significantly change the appearance, they dont change the biology one bit.. the trans woman will still have two X genes, the man will still have XY. the trans man wont start getting pregnant, and the trans woman wont start producing sperm....iand f the pills run out, you start to revert in most cases to the natural biological state, sans chopped off items growing back of course.

A persons "true" identity is still where it has always been, not in the body, but in the mind.

.

Regardless, how should society treat individuals that look like women, and hold themselves out as women?

 easysauce wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Biology does matter. That's why they are using surgery and hormones to make their biology match their identity.

you dont know what biology is... surgery cannot change your biological sex anymore then it can change your race or species. It can sure make you LOOK like whatever else, but thats not the same.

surgery and hormone pills are not a persons "biology", and these process 100% do NOT make someone trans gendered (they are welcome changes that I fully support for concenting adults to undergo).

Actually, it's you who doesn't know what biology is. Hormones and physical characteristics(taxonomy) are very much someone's biology. You keep using "biology" when the word you want is "genetics".

 easysauce wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Biology does matter. That's why they are using surgery and hormones to make their biology match their identity.

you dont know what biology is... surgery cannot change your biological sex anymore then it can change your race or species. It can sure make you LOOK like whatever else, but thats not the same.

surgery and hormone pills are not a persons "biology", and these process 100% do NOT make someone trans gendered (they are welcome changes that I fully support for concenting adults to undergo)

otherwise, I could take an unwilling participant, do some surgery + pills, and bam, your are now biologically a woman.

So while they may significantly change the appearance, they dont change the biology one bit.. the trans woman will still have two X genes, the man will still have XY. the trans man wont start getting pregnant, and the trans woman wont start producing sperm....iand f the pills run out, you start to revert in most cases to the natural biological state, sans chopped off items growing back of course.

A persons "true" identity is still where it has always been, not in the body, but in the mind.

Well, you don't seem to understand biology yourself considering that you appear to be under the impression of "be born with the right part between your leg and the right chromosome and bam you are now a man or a woman.

A person with the male chromosome and a penis can still be biologically a woman because what happens in your brain is just as much biology as the hormones that you might be exposed to while developing, both of which can make you a female due to biological factors despite what parts or chromosomes you were born with.

There is a lot you don't know, and your statements make that pretty clear to everyone.

 Polonius wrote:
Regardless, how should society treat individuals that look like women, and hold themselves out as women?

Women are to be treated the same as men, so no different treatment based on percieved identity is required in the first place.


so I would actually have women competing against men in events, and would have 0 issues with trans gendered competitors as it wouldnt matter.

 trexmeyer wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 trexmeyer wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:
Regardless of anything else I would be interested to see any studies of pre and post treatment performance, and performance of post treatment people vs their new gender. It would be interesting to see what the olympic decision was based on as well.

It's impossible to analyze male to female transgender performance. There are not enough available cases to study. Too many variables concerning the performance level of the individual prior to gender reassignment and too many different physical attributes to measure across a very wide spectrum of sporting events.

I will preface this by saying I am a clinical scientist - while the population of trans athletes is not huge, it is surprisingly large. Even if the current population is not sufficiently large to make any kind of fine level predictions possible, it should be more than large enoigh to give you at least general trends. And as time goes on, the population will only increase.

I would say more but I am now going to the pub

You'd have to analyze VO2 max, limit strength, explosive strength, reflexes, and hand eye coordination before and after at a minimum. That's not very simple.

Whilst it would be nice to have that data and other information, you really don't need it if you have records of performance in competitions and other public data (such as age, height and so on).

It would be reasonably simple to get a reasonable measure on gender swap athletes and how they relate to the population they wish to compete against.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Well looks like im the loner here. She should have the right. She is legally a female. And this policy directly discriminates against Transgendered. And believe it or not. Those men going under hormone therapy are actually loosing muscles.

From the point at which they started hormone therapy, sure. But unless the man starts hormone therapy at puberty, he'll always have an unfair advantage over women who have always been women.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Well looks like im the loner here. She should have the right. She is legally a female. And this policy directly discriminates against Transgendered. And believe it or not. Those men going under hormone therapy are actually loosing muscles.

From the point at which they started hormone therapy, sure. But unless the man starts hormone therapy at puberty, he'll always have an unfair advantage over women who have always been women.

due to what? Increased bone density? Any increase in muscle brought about by being male is nullified by hormone replacement therapy.

 kronk wrote:
"If you were born with a wang, then you have to tee-off from the men's box." Golf Digest.

My give a gak on this issue is non-existant.

Why didn't the thread end here?

 Redbeard wrote:
So, if I make a case that I had an African ancestor, some number of generations ago, I could choose to present myself as African American, qualifying for all the minority employment criteria, in spite of the fact that these are in place specifically to help actual minorities? Because that's "my" identity?

What is an "actual" minority?

 Goliath wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:
I'm advocating nothing of the sort, especially not the rigidity of gender roles. I humored the idea of the "woman gender role" for the sake of argument but really, "biological females being biological females" isn't much of a role because I do not view MTFs to be women. I'm simply trying to understand the definition that people have ITT, because I personally think the emphasis placed on gender roles here or in society at large is given way too much relevance.

I know it fits in with your whole world view thing, but that bit I've bolded... Seriously? You can write that out with a straight face and not go "okay, maybe I *am* being bit intolerant"

A few things though:

1) Women/female is an inherently social term, and using them to define sexual/biological roles is, at best, a bit wishy-washy.

2)If, you walked past most Post-op trans* people, you wouldn't be able to tell. Who are you to say "Oh, well before I thought you were a woman, cause you looked like one to me! now though, cause I know you used to be a biological male, I'm not going to accept you as female."?

3)I also think gender roles are given too much relevance, in that they shouldn't exist. full stop. Sexual roles are a thing, but they can be changed sex should follow one's gender, not the other way around, so arguing that someone shouldn't have as many rights as others because they had the misfortune to be born with their sex matching their gender strikes me as rather mean.

Do you actually believe this stuff, out of curiosity?

 Redbeard wrote:

squidhills wrote:GQ had an article on a transgendered MMA fighter (I forget her name) that I read recently. It was in the same issue as the Duck Dynasty homophobia incident, so if you have or can find that issue, that's my source.

Anywho, the article says that, given all of the estrogen a transgendered person takes every day, they actually have lower muscle mass than a man, and usually less testosterone than a normal woman would. This particular MMA fighter actually has less defined muscles on her body, because getting as ripped as most MMA fighters is impossible with as much estrogen coursing through your blood as she has. Yes, her bone density is higher than a woman's, but nobody has suggested that bone density is some kind of unfair advantage in a kung-fu fight.

That would be relevant if the question was could a trans-woman compete on even footing with a cis-male. And, according to what you said, the answer in that case would be no, because they don't have the same muscle mass.

However, that's not the relevant question to be asking or answering here. If we accept that a trans-woman loses muscle mass due to her hormone treatments, the relevant question is does she lose enough muscle mass to make it a fair competition with cis-women, and I don't think there's any data on that.

I didn't make it clear in my original post, but the MMA fighter wasn't competing against men; she was competing against women. Quite a few potential opponents had issues with her having been born a man, claiming that she was naturally stronger than any female opponent due to her "male" musculature. In the two bouts she has fought since coming out as trans, it was made pretty clear that she wasn't any stronger than her female opponents, and the reason is that all of the estrogen she sucks down each morning prevents her from putting on the kind of muscle you'd see on a man. In the end, she is on a more even footing with a female opponent than she would be with a male one. In her current physical state, forcing her to only fight male opponents because she was born male would be unfair, as she is measurably weaker than they are. Denying her the opportunity to compete in any sport at all (which would be the practical result of preventing her from competing with women, as there aren't enough athletes to form a trans sport league) would be wrong.

 ZultanQ wrote:

Transwomen trying to pass as actual women has everything to do with gender roles, because if you are claiming that transwomen can become actual biological females, that's obviously not true. See: pregnancy. And if you say "well they can be close enough", I'm saying no, they cannot.

Is a person who has female genitalia, but never develops the corresponding internal sex organs, a woman?

 easysauce wrote:

If anything is being trivialized, its actual biological men and women, and what it means to be one.

Yep, cisgendered people, the people who make up the lion's share of the population and which society is built around, are the ones being trivialized.

The weirdest idea running through this thread is that all women are identical clones with identical athletic potential and performance and that adding more women who have potentially slightly different physiology is going to ruin the purity of the event. Guys, the purity of the event doesn't exist. People's athletic performance and potential already varies a ton anyway. Unless post-op trans women have some serious overriding advantage (no evidence of which has been produced such far) it's an absolute nonissue, because the field isn't even to begin with and any advantage (or disadvantage; if trans women build muscle like cis women and have heavier skeletons then wouldn't that be a hindrance?) is going to be lost in the noise.

 Redbeard wrote:

However, that's not the relevant question to be asking or answering here. If we accept that a trans-woman loses muscle mass due to her hormone treatments, the relevant question is does she lose enough muscle mass to make it a fair competition with cis-women, and I don't think there's any data on that.

If you don't let them compete, there won't be any data.

I mean, hypothetically you could arrange a competition for the purposes of creating data, but that runs into issues of competitor selection and effort that would almost certainly render it inaccurate.